moonslav59

This should casuse managers to use the lefty-righty-lefty line-ups even more.

I seem to remember 1 or 2 agreeing with that position.

It might be harder to draft better players with the 14th pick vs the 20th, but if staying "somewhat competitive" means extending Betts, one could view that as helping us be more competitive in 2021 ans beyond. I do see the logic in thinking let's go total reset for 2020, and deal away every player not viewed as being helpful in 2021, but the bigger decision is do you expand that thinking to 2022 as well? Guys like ERod, Workman and Barnes could all be very key pieces to returning to glory in 2021, but it sort of forces a 1 year window and not a longer term plan- not that we can't extend or resign most or all of those three. My guess is JBJ and all the FAs go, even Holt. We may look to trade JD (assuming he does not opt out). Trading Price, Sale and/or Eovaldi when their stock is low doesn't seems like a good idea, despite opening up some partial future spending space. I could see trading one of them at the deadline.

If the plan is to reset, then even non tendering JBJ and getting him to sign for $5-7M a year might still put us over the luxury tax, or it would disallow us from signing any FAs, even minor ones.

What do I think vs what do I want are 2 different things. I want to reset. I think we will. Assuming that, JBJ goes. Leon may be back, if he takes $1M. We bring up Dalbec and maybe let Travis and Ockimey fight for a platoon role. Chatham fights for utility with Lin and Marco. Chavis is in the mix at 2B and 1B, but I'm not expecting him to get much better. (I hope I am surprised.) I like DHern's chances at improving. Maybe Houck or some other pitcher steps up, but I'm not optimistic on that front. I think we hold onto Price & Sale, at least in hopes that they raise their trade stock- at most to still be here when the rebuild is complete, if short enough. To me, the most likely big trade name is not Betts or Price, but JD. We can get more for him than Price, and he is not part of the plan for 2022-2023, maybe not even 2021, if he opts out. Keep Devers, Bogey and Betts. If the rebuild looks longer than one year, we need to consider trading Workman and players who will be FAs after 2021 (ERod- ouch =, that hurts me to say! and Barnes)

These dates might not be exactly accurate, but here is a list of Sox prospects by the years they dropped off soxprospects.com's top 20 rankings list: 2004: Lester Youkilis 2005: B Moss Shoppach 2006: Pedroia Delcarmen 2007: Lester 2008: Ellsbury Buchholz Lowrie Masterson D Murphy 2009: Bard 2010: Reddick 2011: Iggy Doubront 2012: Middlebrooks Ranaudo 2013: Barnes 2014: Betts Bogey JBJ Vazquez Workman Swihart 2015: ERod (traded for as a prospect) Johnson Marrero 2016: Devers 2017: Beni (Moncada) 2018: Travis Beeks 2019: Chavis 2020: DHern _____

Yes! Some clowns (or was it just one) wanted to trade him earlier this year! Our lowest paid starter. The team wins and wins and wins when he starts.

I kinda like the idea, but it really changes the game, probably too much for my liking. Some of those long battling ABs are classic.

I'm optimistic on DHern, but he still has to bring down the BBs. Chavis has a lot to prove, IMO. He had a great start to 2019, but really tailed off for several months. I like the big hits he got. I don't see the next Betts, Bogey, Devers or Moncada in our system. Role players are needed, but we'll need some serious help, if we're going to get back to the top quickly.

Any? Maybe "regret" is not the right word, and I've said over and over I'm glad we won the ring and it was worth it, but let's not sugar coat that those 3 division wins and the 2018 ring came with a price. The trades we made worked for what we wanted, but we gave up a good chunk of our future to have those wonderful 3 years. We gave up some very nice young talent. Some will never amount to much, but some very likely will. To me, it's certainly okay to look back on these deals now and a few years from now and wonder "what if?"

Nope. I stilllike the deal, but I'm very concerned.

It's just plain short-sighted to say, "Nobody we've traded has done well, yet, so the trades are all great." We traded prospects- some far away one- for vets. Nobody expected the tardes to be even after 2-3 years.

Really? Look deeper.

Exactly, and many of the players in my study had another 7 WAR season at a much older age than Betts will be in the next 2-3 years.

Good one.

Look at the NFL preseason, now. Nobody of value plays, and if they do, it's hardly ever.

Great post, but not all here were part of the "same crowd."

Actually, Johnson and Velazquez have shown some good stretches over their careers. Look, I have little faith in Johnson or Velazquez, in fact, I have close to zero faith in either of them, but I see Chacin in about the same way- maybe a little better. I'd bring all 3 back next spring along with others and see who may shine. Chances are none of these three will, but the more we bring back, the better chance we have that one or two turn out okay. Johnson looked very promising in 2018. That was not that long ago. Again, I have little hope in Brian, but that 2018 sample size is way bigger than Chacin's brief flash of goodness. Johnson had 13 starts, last year. We went 9-4 in his starts and he had a 4.15 ERA. Overall, he pitched just under 100 IP with a 4.17 ERA. (MLB: 4.84 ERA in 166 IP/ AAA: 3.21 ERA in 278 IP/AA 2.83 ERA in 124 IP) Velazquez had 8 starts in 2018. He also had 1 4.15 ERA as a SP'er, and we went 5-3 in his starts. Hector has already proven he can go 85 IP with a 3.18 ERA (2018). (MLB: 3.85 in 161 IP/ AAA- 2.34 ERA in 119 IP/ Mexican League 3.76 ERA in 687 IP) I don't expect him to do that in 2020, but I think we should bring him back. Chacin has a long history in MLB. He's been good and very good, at times. He has a 4.00 ERA from 2016-2018 with a 1.28 WHIP. Sure, there's hope. Sure, I'dlike to see him in the mix next spring. He's had longer stretches of success than Johnson and Velazquez, but he also has looked as bad as them both. He was at 5.79 with MIL, this year with a 1.52 WHIP in 89 IP. He's been over 4.80 in 3 of his last 6 seasons. He's been under 3.90 the other 3.

Your point emphasizes the fact that most of the players we traded have yet to reach their time. Nobody has said we'd have won in 2016, 2017 or 2018 had we kept all the kids. It was about not trading so many and being better positioned for 2020 and well beyond.

JBJ is my favorite player, but I have said numerous time, I would not pay what the estimated arb will be. My post was not in defense of bringing him back. It was about the over emphasis on BA. I came out against an idea a poster suggested that we extend him at $21M/3. I'd be against $10M/2, if that was enough to put us over the luxury tax in 2020. If we can keep him and reset, I'm all for keeping him. If we trade Betts or JD, I'd be interested in keeping JBJ, but not at near his likely arb number.

The whole DD philosophy was to build a 3-5 year window to win a ring(s). It looks like it lasted 3 years, but he got what the goal was all about: winning at least one ring. I'm glad we won, of this debate would be much more heated. I was fine with the overall plan, although I disagreed with some deals and the extent he raided the farm, but we won, and I'm happy. There's no guarantee we'd be looking at a ring(s) in the next 2-3 years had we not made the trades or even not made some of the trades. We may never know, if we'd have won in 2018 without this deal or that. Some are pretty clear, but others are not. The fact is, DD did trade away much of our future hopes for the here and now. Certainly our future would look better, now, had we not made some or all of the trades. Some player already are making a difference, while others look much more promising than the prospects and young players we have right now. Here's a look at where we MIGHT BE going forward had we not made any of DD's deals- granted this is not a reasonable supposition. SP: ERod, Price, Eovaldi, Allen, Beeks, Kopech, Espinoza, D Hern RP: Workman, Barnes, Buttrey, Hembree, Taylor, Walden, Anderson C: Vaz, Leon or Centeno 1B: Shaw, Chavis 2B: Moncada 3B: Devers SS: Bogey IF: Dubon, Marco, Asuaje, Lin, Dalbec, Chatham LF: Beni, Basabe CF: JBJ, Margot (maybe trade or non tender JBJ) RF: Betts DH: JD

Do we really think a better pitching coach would have gotten more out of the guys on that list? Can we blame Cora for choosing the wrong guy to start, when every one on the list sucked or ended up sucking when used? Would we be in the race or much closer, if we had German & Green, instead of Velazquez, Johnson, Cashner & Weber?

With all due respect, I think almost every player that makes the bigs looks good for short periods of time. If we happen to just watch for that short sample size, it's easy to get an inflated opinion on the guy. It's better to withhold definitive statements until sample sizes are large enough to have a better idea of the true nature of a given player's talent level. That does not mean we can't get our hopes up every time someone looks good for a couple games, but when those numbers are at odds with the player's minor league history, we should be more cautious with our enthusiasm. Chacin has looked pretty good, but let's see how he looks after a few more starts and IP'd.

They also had better starting depth, thanks to their better farm. I'm not sure it's Cora's fault these guys sucked: GS ERA as a SP'er SP Depth 8 6.95 Velazquez 7 5.09 Johnson 6 8.01 Cashner 3 7.94 Weber 2 0.00 Chacin 2 9.82 J Smith 1 9.00 DHern 2 0.00 Taylor & Lakins (3 IP total) (31 Starts by non top 5 starters) NYY (40 GS'd by non top 5 SP'ers) 24 4.28 German 13 4.15 Green 3 5.73 Loaisiga 3 24.00 Tarpley, Holder, Cortes (6 IP total)

Very true, but many have just made it to the bigs, so time will tell. Certainly some of these guys may end up no better than Shawaryn, but there was a time I viewed Beeks and Buttrey about the same as I do Shawary, Weber and Smith.